2056 bus engine and L-Jet

[vwbusman215]

My plan on rebuilding my slowly dying bus engine is approaching soon (tax refund) and I need some advice. I have been reading a lot but still have a few questions...

Here are my plans for the engine...

Stock cylinders bored to 96mm
New pistons from aircooled.net (96mm of course)
107i Web cam w/ new hydro lifters
Rebuilt 1.8l heads for better flow
Also would like to get rid of existing heat exchangers and replace with a decent exhaust

Ok, that's the meat of the plan, and here is a few questions...

I want to bump the CR but am not sure on an good number to shoot for. I know it is currently @ apprx 7.3:1, and I have heard everything from staying stock to jumping to upwards of 8.5:1 for a bus. I think I also remember reading that Ray G. said he would go nothing less than 8.2:1 with the L-Jet setup as I will be sticking with this system. Any input on this would help me. I just want a reliable bus engine that will have more power than stock, as much as I can get on a budget and keeping the L-Jet and hydro lifters. (I know a lot of people hate the hydros, but I think they will serve me well in my application. I'm not looking for a high reving drag bus or anything. Something low maintnence and reliable.) What CR should I aim for with these factors in mind?

Is there any reason why this setup wouldn't work with the L-Jet, I don't see any reason, but I'm not an expert.

Also, this one may be a bit more tricky, is there any modifications to the valve train required when using the 107i cam, or can I stick with the stock pushrods and everything. I have a set of NOS pushrods for a hydro motor I would like to use.

Thanks for any input on this and I hope any of these questions aren't bonehead questions. I am somewhat new to this but don't know any other way to learn than by asking lots of questions, reading everything I can, and just doing it! Thanks in advance.

Casey www.angelfire.com/tx5/76vwbus

ps. sorry about the length

[ray greenwood]

Hello, yes....keep the compression up. Usually the lower compresion engines were put in the carbed models. They had less on demand enrichment capability centered around temperature, and could not keep from detonating with the higher compressions. I have found that the factory FI systems did not respond as well to delicate adjustments to air fuel ratio when the compression has dropped too low. They are less efficient in low compresion configuration and probably did not mix/swirl as well at lower compression. Ray

[vwbusman215]

Thanks Ray,
I knew you would be the guy to set me straight on the compression!

Casey

[vwbusman215]

Hey Bulley,
Thanks for the info. I have decided and my engine is being built as we speak (type, whatever) to stick with stock bore/stroke for now. Mainly due to budget and time constraints. I will one day hopefully have a Raby 2270 "F" bus motor, but that will be much later down the road. I did however go with the 107i web cam, I wanted to keep the hydro lifter (of course I bought new web cam lifters too) and bumped CR to 8.0:1 instead of stock. Went slightly bigger on the heads to 41x34mm, but other than that kept it mostly stock for now. I think I'll be happy with it. I also got a mallory vac adv optical pickup dist from John at aircooled.net. Man that thing is nice! I love it. I should have the rebuilt engine back in the bus in about 2 weeks.



------------------
Casey
www.angelfire.com/tx5/76vwbus

[Bulley]

The Stock L-jet has done fine for me on three 2056 engines, one in a 914, one in a bus, one in my current Vanagon Westfalia. The last two even passed smog tests with great numbers.

A bit off subject, but after further study, I understand now that busses respond better to a longer stroke, and a stock bore. the 78.4 x 94 gives a really nice torque curve where the bus needs it. If I had it to do over...

Any thought about going for more stroke, rather than more bore?